Tradcast Express.
Speaking on February 9th, Cupich argued that France's so-called apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia
forces a paradigm shift in Catholic practice and is therefore revolutionary.
Well, that's actually quite true, but of course Cupich is not condemning that, he is gung-ho about it.
The full transcript of the pre-tent cardinal speech was published on February 9th at La Stampa's Vatican Insider
under the title,
Pope France's Revolution of Murder,
Amoris Laetitia as a New Paradigm of Catholicity.
The whole thing is riddled with so many errors, heresies, and even blasphemy
that we can't cover all of it in this little podcast here,
but let me at least touch on some of the highlights.
Cupich says that Amoris Laetitia rejects, quote,
an authoritarian or paternalistic way of dealing with people that lays down the law,
that pretends to have all the answers or easy answers to complex problems,
that suggests that general rules will seamlessly bring immediate clarity
or that the teachings of our tradition can preemptively be applied
to the particular challenges confronting couples and families, unquote.
In other words, human situations are way more complex than God ever envisioned,
who obviously didn't have the 21st century in mind when he ignorantly and bigotedly decreed,
thou shalt not commit adultery.
Well, good thing we've got Club France,
to straighten it all out for us.
Now, what does Mr. Cupich recommend as part of that New Paradigm
based on France's Infernal Document?
You guessed it, accompaniment.
But not just any accompaniment.
No, it is accompaniment that is, quote,
marked by a deep respect for the conscience of the faithful, unquote.
And he said that we cannot pretend to have a general rule
that's just going to apply to every single case,
and so,
therefore, you first need to get to know the individuals and walk with them.
Yeah, you know, kind of like how St. John the Baptist first sat down with King Herod
and, with a deep respect for the man's conscience,
walked with him, talked with him about his irregular situation,
and then invited him to consider a suggestion or two
about what would be the even better thing to do in his particular case.
Yeah, that's not really how it happened, is it?
But then,
not to worry, because Blaze the Merciful has discovered
that God's revelation did not end with the death of the last apostle,
as the Catholic Church dogmatically teaches,
but is still ongoing and apparently has now found its oracle in
adulterous couples.
The phony Archbishop of Chicago says, quote,
Doctrine can develop as a result of the Church's merciful accompaniment of families,
because God has chosen the family as a privileged place
to reveal all that the God of mercy,
mercy is doing in our time, unquote.
In other words, the Church owes an apology to the English King Henry VIII
and all the Catholic martyrs then,
because if the Church had only begun that merciful accompaniment a bit sooner,
then we could have avoided the whole Anglican schism
and the fierce persecution of the Church in England.
But no, a lot of blood was spilled
and a lot of people were persecuted, imprisoned, and died
because, if we use novel sort of logic,
the Church just,
wasn't merciful enough yet.
Cupich argues that, quote,
Doctrinal development is about remaining open to the invitation
to see our moral teachings on marriage and family life
through the lens of God's omnipotent mercy, unquote,
implying, of course, that for 2,000 years,
the Church got it all wrong,
teaching that forgiveness can only come with proper contrition,
and this contrition implies the sincere desire to amend one's life.
Cupich, being the little devil,
he is, tries to make you think
that by adhering to traditional Catholic teaching on this,
you're denying God's omnipotence,
when what you're really doing
is simply adhering faithfully to what God has revealed,
the conditions for forgiveness are.
But let me say some more about this curious claim
that God is revealing himself to man through the family.
Cupich got that straight from Francis, from Amoris Laetitia,
and he echoes it in his speech.
Cupich says, quote,
God has chosen the family,
as a privileged place to reveal how God acts
and relates to humanity and the world, unquote.
Well, there's just one little problem with that.
It's false.
And you know what?
I don't even have to prove it false
because Cupich never makes any effort to prove it right to begin with.
He just asserts it and refers to Amoris Laetitia,
which doesn't prove it either.
In any case, I guess what Mr. Cupich is saying here
is that we can wreck our marriages
and fail to raise our children properly,
and then say,
well, hey, that's God revealing himself in families today.
Such blasphemous claptrap is unbearable.
All of this, by the way, is based on the old modernistic view,
which derives ultimately from the German idealist Georg Hegel,
that history is the continual self-communication
or self-revelation of God.
In his 1950 landmark encyclical against resurgent modernism,
Humani Generis,
Pope Pius XII denounced, quote,
a certain historicism which attributing value only to the events of man's life
overthrows the foundation of all truth,
an absolute law both on the level of philosophical speculations
and especially to Christian dogmas, unquote.
Now that's a real pope speaking.
Back to Cupich.
Yes, there's more, lots more.
He elaborates on his idea about conscience,
a very distorted version of which is the golden calf of our times.
Our modernist would-be cardinal says the following
about the discernment of married couples and families, quote,
their decisions of conscience represent God's personal guidance
for the particularities of their lives.
In other words, the voice of conscience, the voice of God,
could very well affirm the necessity of living at some distance
from the church's understanding of the ideal, unquote.
Wow, this is blasphemous.
First, no, conscience cannot affirm the necessity of sinning.
Notice how Blaise is euphemistically calling it
living at some distance from the church's understanding of the ideal.
Really, really cute.
It's called sin.
And with regard to holy purity, mortal sin.
Second, there's blasphemy here because Cupich the seducer is claiming
that conscience is the voice of God.
And therefore he's saying that God can command you,
to sin.
That's entirely in line with Amor's Laetitia, granted.
But it sure isn't in line with the teaching of Jesus Christ
or the real Catholic Church.
Or, I might add, the nature of God.
Third, no, the voice of conscience is not the voice of God.
If you want to know what the voice of God says about morality,
well, turn to Exodus chapter 20,
beginning with verse 1 and ending at verse 20.
Something about 10 commandments,
Mr. Cupich.
Not 10 suggestions or 10 ideal situations,
but 10 commandments.
After giving these commandments,
Scripture notes in verse 18,
quote,
So if you want to hear the voice of God
about what we ought and ought not to do,
Mr. Cupich,
that's where you're going to find it.
Not in your discipleship,
distorted idea of personal conscience,
which is ultimately nothing but
do whatever you want,
just make sure you have a really good reason for it.
Now, Cupich bases his false notion of conscience
on a text from Vatican II's pastoral constitution,
Gaudium et Spes,
which in turn cites a radio address
from Pope Pius XII,
given on March 23, 1952.
Now, needless to say,
Pius XII did not say or imply
that conscience is the voice of God.
He merely said that the voice of God
echoes in a true conscience,
since conscience is the application
of the moral law given by God
to a particular human action.
The Cupich version of conscience,
on the other hand,
is this absurd and destructive idea
that God speaks to each individual
to tell him what the right thing to do is
in his particular case.
And that could be totally at odds
with those rigid rules promulgated at Mount Sinai.
This is blasphemy.
And this blasphemy is called situation ethics.
Now, interestingly enough,
Pius XII, in the very address
that is cited in Gaudium et Spes,
and that Cupich basically relies on,
condemns the Cupich notion of conscience entirely.
Speaking of the attack on sound morality
that situation ethics poses,
Pius XII said,
quote,
The first blow against the edifice
of Christian moral norms
would be that of separating
them, as is intended,
from the constrictive and oppressive vigilance
of the authority of the Church
so that, freed from the
sophistical subtleties of the
casuistic method, morality is
restored to its original form
and returned to simply the intelligence
and determination of the
individual conscience.
Everyone sees what disastrous consequences
this would lead to,
such a devastation of the
very foundations of education.
The divine Redeemer has
entrusted his revelation,
of which moral obligations form an essential
part, of course, not to
individual men, but rather
to his Church, to which
he has given the mission to lead them
to embrace that sacred deposit
with fidelity.
Unquote. Yep, that's
bad news for Blaise the Bombastic.
The voice of God was not
given to each individual in conscience
as though every decision we make
about morality is God's very
speaking through us. No,
the voice of God was given to
the Church in divine revelation
and this Church teaches
Christ's true moral precepts
until the end of time.
And one of those precepts is,
thou shalt not commit adultery.
Not, it would be better if you
didn't commit adultery, or I wish
you'd not commit adultery, or
adultery is not the ideal of Christian
marriage, or adultery is
almost a marriage, or most
people shouldn't commit adultery, but let's have
a look at your circumstances first.
No, it's simply, thou
shalt not commit adultery.
By the way, what's amazing is
that these ideas about how we just
need to allow people to make their own
conscientious decisions
because they're so mature now,
somehow that always only ever
applies to sins against
the Sixth and Ninth Commandments.
But what's good for the
goose is good for the gander. If you can
invoke personal conscience regarding
fornication or adultery,
why not also for,
you know, murder, or
rape, detraction, calumny,
blasphemy, and especially
the politically correct
Francis sins like failure to
recycle, or using too much
air conditioning, marginalizing
the vulnerable, not opening your
door to the migrant.
Don't you hate logic?
Alright folks, enough of this,
we need to wrap it up here. You know,
Cupich spends a lot of time here
in this speech talking about how there is
so much complexity in family life,
and there are so many singular
circumstances now that weren't
there before. Well, you know,
that may all be true, but it's
ultimately irrelevant because
it still cannot justify
evil acts.
Adultery and fornication
and the unnatural kind are evil
in themselves. There is
not a single circumstance in the
world that could justify
them. If you could convert the
entire world in an instant
and ensure that all people,
would go to heaven if only you
committed a single sin, doesn't even
matter which sin, you would not
be allowed to do it.
All the circumstances in the world
cannot make an intrinsically
evil act a good act.
Let me close with
a word of warning to Mr. Cupich.
You keep preaching this false
gospel, sir, and when the Lord
calls you to judgment, you will find
yourself in very complex,
concrete circumstances.
Tradcast Express is a production
of Novus Ordo Watch. Check us out
at Tradcast.org, and if you like
what we're doing, please consider making a
tax-deductible contribution at
NovusOrdoWatch.org
slash donate.